ACL Findings2024
Prompt Chaining or Stepwise Prompt? Refinement in Text Summarization
Shichao Sun, Ruifeng Yuan, Ziqiang Cao, Wenjie Li, Pengfei Liu
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the capacity to improve summary quality by mirroring a human-like iterative process of critique and refinement starting from the initial draft. Two strategies are designed to perform this iterative process: Prompt Chaining and Stepwise Prompt. Prompt chaining orchestrates the drafting, critiquing, and refining phases through a series of three discrete prompts, while Stepwise prompt integrates these phases within a single prompt. However, the relative effectiveness of the two methods has not been extensively studied. This paper is dedicated to examining and comparing these two methods in the context of text summarization to ascertain which method stands out as the most effective. Experimental results show that the prompt chaining method can produce a more favorable outcome. This might be because stepwise prompt might produce a simulated refinement process according to our various experiments. Since refinement is adaptable to diverse tasks, our conclusions have the potential to be extrapolated to other applications, thereby offering insights that may contribute to the broader development of LLMs.
Ask Lune
Ask anything. The answer quotes the paper.
Lune reads all of it and the papers around it, then shows you the passages behind every answer.
Lune answers from
the full paper · 4 top-tier papers that cite it · related work
Free to start. No credit card required.
Cited by top-tier papers4
- eaSEL: Promoting Social-Emotional Learning and Parent-Child Interaction through AI-Mediated Content ConsumptionJocelyn J. Shen, Jennifer King Chen, Leah Findlater, Griffin Dietz SmithCHI 2025 · 23 citations
- AutoIOT: LLM-Driven Automated Natural Language Programming for AIoT ApplicationsLeming Shen, Qiang Yang, Yuanqing Zheng, Mo LiMobiCom 2025 · 14 citations
- PwnGPT: Automatic Exploit Generation Based on Large Language ModelsWanzong Peng, Lin Ye, Xuetao Du, Hongli Zhang et al.ACL 2025 · 7 citations
- Identifying, Explaining, and Correcting Ableist Language with AIKynnedy Simone Smith, Lydia B. Chilton, Danielle BraggCHI 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on8
- Self-Refine: Iterative Refinement with Self-FeedbackAman Madaan, Niket Tandon, Prakhar Gupta, Skyler Hallinan et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 4,972 citations
- AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human FeedbackYann Dubois, Chen Xuechen Li, Rohan Taori, Tianyi Zhang et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 948 citations
- CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive CritiquingZhibin Gou, Zhihong Shao, Yeyun Gong, Yelong Shen et al.ICLR 2024 · 699 citations
- PandaLM: An Automatic Evaluation Benchmark for LLM Instruction Tuning OptimizationYidong Wang, Zhuohao Yu, Wenjin Yao, Zhengran Zeng et al.ICLR 2024 · 368 citations
- Large Language Models Can Self-ImproveJiaxin Huang, Shixiang Gu, Le Hou, Yuexin Wu et al.EMNLP 2023 · 184 citations
Related papers
- SummIt: Iterative Text Summarization via ChatGPTHaopeng Zhang, Xiao Liu, Jiawei ZhangEMNLP Findings 2023 · 58 citations
- Understanding the Effects of Iterative Prompting on TruthfulnessSatyapriya Krishna, Chirag Agarwal, Himabindu LakkarajuICML 2024 · 24 citations
- AI Chains: Transparent and Controllable Human-AI Interaction by Chaining Large Language Model PromptsTongshuang Wu, Michael Terry, Carrie Jun CaiCHI 2022 · 465 citations
- Chain-of-Interactions: Multi-step Iterative ICL Framework for Abstractive Task-Oriented Dialogue Summarization of Conversational AI InteractionsJason S. Lucas, Ali Al-Lawati, Mahjabin Nahar, John Chen et al.EMNLP Findings 2025
- Evoke: Evoking Critical Thinking Abilities in LLMs via Reviewer-Author Prompt EditingXinyu Hu, Pengfei Tang, Simiao Zuo, Zihan Wang et al.ICLR 2024 · 14 citations
